[4/15: Updated to add Eric Swalwell's candidacy
[4/15: Updated to add comments on Pete Buttigieg]
[4/15: Updated to add comments on Andrew Yang]
[4/22: Updated to add Seth Moulton's candidacy]
[5/15: Updated to add Steve Bullock's and Michael Bennet's candidacies]
[5/16: Updated to add Bill de Blasio's candidacy]
Back in 1980, an excellent comedy on Marin County California, starring Martin Mull was released. It was called “Serial”, based on the original novel which was serialized in a Marin County alternative weekly newspaper before being published as a book.
The movie was not successful in theatrical release, but found more following once it made its way to premium cable channels such as HBO.
Near the end of the move, one of the secondary characters, Stokeley, a young teenage boy, checks on Martin Mull’s character, protagonist Harvey Holroyd, who is recovering from a nervous breakdown.
Stokeley says to Harvey: "In an insane society the sane man must appear insane" to point out that Harvey was indeed the sane person in the insane society that was Marin County. Harvey asked Stokeley where he got that from, and Stokeley replies “Star Trek”. However, like Jules Winnfield’s infamous bible quote in Pulp Fiction, Stokeley’s Star Trek quote was not real. That line was never said in any Star Trek episode.
I recently divided the list of Democrat presidential candidates into a “Sane” and “Insane” group. Nothing against Democrats, one could do the same for the Republican party. The thing is, right now, like the GOP in 2016, the Democrats have a lot of presidential primary candidates.
By “Sane”, I mean center-left candidates who are careful to avoid being tagged as “extremist” or “radical” and are avoiding wholesale endorsement of popular, but hard to implement, proposals. By “Insane”, I mean progressive-left candidates who are eager to claim the progressive mantle, and are either offering, or endorsement popular, but hard to implement proposals.
The Green New Deal, Medicare for All, Free College for All, $15 Minimum Wage, UBI, Jobs Guarantee, etc., endorsing multiple of these policies qualifies a candidate for the “Insane” tag. Distancing oneself from multiple of these policies qualifies a candidate for the “Sane” tag.
To dive deeper on this, consider Medicare for All. Medicare today comprises several parts. The original Medicare, Part A, is hospitalization only. What today we would call “catastrophic coverage”. Part A is either “earned” by working the equivalent of at least 10 years full time (or through a spouse who has done so). Otherwise, one must pay a premium to be insured under Part A. Everyone must pay a premium for Part B, which covers non-hospital physician visits. The premium is automatically deducted from Social Security pension payments. Everyone must pay a premium for Part D, which covers non-hospital prescription drugs. All three parts have deductibles and copays, which can be partially covered by enrolling in private Medicare supplement plans.
However, when most people hear “Medicare for All”, and indeed when most politicians promote “Medicare for All”, they are not speaking of a program of basic hospitalization insurance with additional premiums required for doctors’ visits, and optional private supplements. Instead, they are speaking of a program with no earned eligibility requirements and no premiums. While Medicare requires one to work and be a taxpayer, Medicare for All would cover all regardless of work status. Additionally, during the debate over the Affordable Care Act (ACA), Nancy Pelosi publicly stated her desire to get rid of copays, deductibles, and coinsurance. In addition, many progressive politicians are demanding coverage for vision, dental, and long-term care be included. Indeed, the current Medicare for All bill from Representative Pramila Jayapal would cover standard health care along with vision, dental, and substance-abuse care, and would not charge patients copays, or have deductibles.
Part of the problem with the original ACA was it was larded up with additional coverages, which increased the price for policies. But the lessons of why the ACA has failed to deliver have not been learned. Indeed, they have not even been investigated.
Some have proposed a universal, government paid for catastrophic coverage, similar to Medicare Part A, and then leverage employers and the ACA Exchange for general health insurance, which would solve the “Medical Bankruptcy” problem, but this flies against the demands of progressives.
The cost of a “Medicare for All” with full coverage at no cost to the patient is Insanely high. Bernie Sanders proposal of a few years ago was estimated to cost $32 trillion over 10 years. Those candidates who are looking at something less are trying to be Sane.
Likewise, the cost of the “Green New Deal” is Insanely high. One group estimated it at $93 trillion over ten years. This included $32 trillion for Medicare for All, which is included with the Green New Deal proposal, so the rest would be about $60 trillion. Others have discounted that estimate, but I did a simple estimate and came up with over $30 trillion just for changes to electrical power generation and changes needed convert homes to all-electric fuel, with no consideration to changes to commercial building, mass transit, or long-distance travel. When one adds in proposals like college loan debt forgiveness, and broader health care coverage beyond Sanders original plan, one can easily begin to approach $100 trillion over 10 years. The 2019 U.S. federal budget is $4.4 trillion. Even with the savings some of these programs would produce, it is not unreasonable to suggest it would require a doubling of the current annual budget, which is fiscally impossible. Or, to put it another way, it is Insane.
Then there is the Insane idea of amending the Constitution to eliminate the Electoral College. First, that would never pass. An amendment requires a two-thirds majority vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate and ratification by three-fourths of the states, the very states which would lose their clout in such a change. Never mind the organizational nightmare a single national vote to a single national standard would create compared to 51 discrete federal votes under 51 state and district standards.
And the Insane idea of amending the Constitution to allow 16 year olds to vote. Many of the Democrats advocating for a 16 year old vote also advocated for 26 year old "children" to be covered by their parent's health insurance, and "children" under 21 to be restricted from purchasing tobacco and firearms. These same people have trotted out evidence a young man's brain has not completed development until age 25 to advocate for lesser criminal sentencing for those under the age of 25. If someone is responsible enough vote at age 16, one would think they are responsible enough to own a firearm--after all, government has access armed to force: police, military, etc.
Here is my list of Democrat candidates for president, and where they rate. I will explain some of my ratings after this list.
Sane (Generally Avoiding Full Support of the Most Controversial Policies)
Michael Bennet
Joe Biden
John Delaney
Amy Klobuchar
Seth Moulton
Tim Ryan
In Between Sane and Insane
Pete Buttigieg (Publicly Sane, Policy both Sane and Insane)
John Hickenlooper (Publicly Insane, Policy Sane)
Jay Inslee (Single-Issue, Policy Conflicted)
Insane (Supporting Multiple Controversial Policies)
Cory Booker
Steve Bullock
Julian Castro
Bill de Blasio
Tulsi Gabbard
Kirsten Gillibrand
Mike Gravel
Kamala Harris
Wayne Messam
Beto O'Rourke
Bernie Sanders
Eric Swalwell
Elizabeth Warren
Marianne Williamson
Andrew Yang
The reality is, as the Democrats’ Overton Window has shifted left, the center-left “Sane” candidates look increasingly like outsiders, or “Insane”. While the more radical, or “Insane” candidates, look “Sane”.
The same thing happened in 2016, as Trump began as clearly an “Insane” candidate, and by the end John Kasich looked positively nuts, refusing to drop out and babbling about his mailman father like Commander Queeg talking about strawberries. Indeed other “Sane” candidates, like Marco Rubio, tried to do the same “Insane” stunts as Trump, like making comparisons about hand size, or making insults. Bobby Jindal, arguably a “Sane” candidate, and the son of immigrants, stated “Immigration without assimilation is an invasion” to boost his strong border bona fides.
I expect we will see similar for the Democrats this time. Joe Biden, who in polling has the strongest chance to beat Trump, in large part because of his moderate history, is tacking left, and trying to position himself as “Woke”, to the point of disparaging the entire concept of British Common Law, in large part because it was created by “White Men”. British Common Law, along with Roman/Germanic/Napoleonic Civil Law (also created by “White Men”), undergirds the vast majority of the world’s legal system. Also, Biden is under coordinated attack to paint him as a sexual predator in order to bring down his candidacy.
Pete Buttigieg’s intersectional identity politic credentials are being debated. And he has tacked increasingly left. Buttigieg arguably is using his midwestern small-city mayor credentials to stake a claim in the “Sane” camp. Just this morning, on a local radio station, I heard a talk show host comment on Buttigieg and she said: “He sounds sane. He sounds moderate.” In other words, she also sees the Sane vs. Insane stratification, and considers “moderate” to be synonymous with “sane”. In other words, it is not just my opinion.
Update 4/15: Pete Buttigieg's position on college financial aid and college debt is Sane, very similar to Amy Klobuchar's proposals. This is a really big deal because Buttigieg announced it at the same time as he announced his official candidacy, and it represents a visible and significant shift away from the progressive edge. However, I would note, no Democrat nor Republican candidate has proposed any policy which would actually reduce the costs of college. The reality is the Educational-Political Complex has subsumed higher education, and has enormous political power to prevent such policies. Instead it rent-seeks via government grants and government guaranteed loans. Despite Buttigieg's Saneness on college funding, he continues to advocate for the quixotic idea of eliminating the Electoral College. For this reason, he remains in the "In Between Sane and Insane" camp.
Andrew Yang can sanely defend his UBI proposal, and indeed a UBI may be necessary at some point in the future, but in a period of historic low U3 unemployment and rising wages, now is clearly not the time. Yang increasingly is promoting his UBI in a way that seems less a serious national economic proposal, and more a tactical vote buying strategy. In addition, Yang has weighed in on the infant circumcision debate, which seems unpresidential. Just today Yang announced a new, critical policy position: Make Daylight Savings Time permanent. This is not serious.
Update 4/15: Andrew Yang has made some very Sane proposals along with his many Insane proposals. He may shift in the future to the "In Between Sane and Insane" group not because he is moderate in most positions, but because of the balance between his various positions. Yang appears to be courting controversy to gain publicity. A kind of "Trump from the Mirror Universe" approach (staying with the Star Trek theme of this post).
Jay Inslee is running on the single issue of Climate Change, and has endorsed the Green New Deal. One should always be cautious of single-issue candidates. Inslee is the governor of Washington state, which is home to Boeing, manufacturer of half of the jetliners used on planet Earth, and jet aircraft are one of the largest contributors to greenhouse gasses. Inslee has ushered tax deals to Boeing, and defended Boeing’s Washington jobs from loss to South Carolina and Kansas. Beyond the Green New Deal, Inslee’s book on battling Climate Change is dismissive of nuclear energy and puts too much confidence in solar and wind power. Other than his single-issue push Inslee is making a point to sound moderate by staking a claim against certain popular Democrat policy positions. However, Inslee’s simultaneous support the Green New Deal and the jetliner industry means Inslee is either a hypocrite or insane.
John Hickenlooper’s bizarre story about taking his mother to see “Deep Throat” puts his carefully crafted “Sane” credentials at risk.
Update 4/15: Eric Swalwell has announced his candidacy. He has a single-issue focus, in his case, on gun control. Based on Swalwell's Insane Twitter comments about attacking legal gun owners with nuclear weapons, he starts solidly in the Insane camp.
Update 4/22: Seth Moulton has announced his candidacy. Moulton has expressed full support for the Green New Deal, but is not in the Medicare for All camp, instead he only proposes to add a "Public Option" to the current Affordable Care Act. He also has not endorsed free college for all or student loan debt forgiveness. He is mostly Sane, and he should provide more detail on what his support of the Green New Deal actually means. Because he is avoiding Insane positions on health care and education, he starts in the Sane camp.
Update 5/15: Steve Bullock and Michael Bennet have announced their candidacies. Bullock is running as a single-issue candidate on campaign finance reform. I automatically put quixotic single-issue candidates in the Insane column because they are not serious candidates. Bennet is positioning himself as a rational centrist, albeit a milquetoast, undifferentiated centrist with no marque proposals. Bennet begins in the Sane camp.
Update 5/16: Bill de Blasio has announced his candidacy. This needs no explanation. Insane.
Big Money and Small Money, and how it tracks to Sane and Insane
In presidential politics, there are two sources of money: Big Money and Small Money. Big money is the large donors, corporations, PACs, etc. Small money is the grass roots individual donations. Generally, big money flows to “Sane” candidates. In 2016, the Democrats’ big money went to Clinton, while Sanders was the champion of small money. For the Republicans, the big money was split, and Trump was the beneficiary of small money. I believe the attacks on Biden are because he is seen as a threat in the big money space. Small money continues to be dominated by Sanders, although Beto O’Rourke had initial success with grass roots fundraising. If he can sustain it is another question. If Biden’s entry is blocked by sexual assault claims, the likely big money beneficiaries are Harris and Klobuchar. While I categorize Harris among the “Insane” for her public policy positions, she is likely to be seen as another Obama, a candidate with one public persona, and a different private persona. If any of the “old white men” (Biden, Delaney, Hickenlooper, or Inslee) gain traction, expect big money to flow their way. However, as soon as Harris is seen cavorting with big money donors, the progressive small donors will reject her.
Tack to the Left/Right in the Primary, Tack to the Center in the General Election
The ideas a Democrat primary candidate can run as a progressive in the primary and then run as a centrist in the general election, and a Republican primary candidate can run as a conservative in the primary and then a centrist in the general election, are long-proven paths. However, in the era of social media, that path may be obsolete. Part of the reason Hillary lost the general election to Trump is many of Sanders’ supporters refused to support Hillary. Some stayed home, some voted for the Green Party candidate Jill Stein, and some voted for Trump. Don’t forget Stein offered to step aside if Sanders would run as the Green Party candidate.
The first important point to consider is the Green New Deal is not a new concept. It began in 2006 in Europe, and was adopted as a platform position by the Green Party in both their 2012 and 2016 campaigns. The Green New Deal, having been endorsed by many of the prospective 2020 Democrat candidates now must be considered “mainstream policy” for the Democrat party. The same can be said for Medicare for All. Single-Payer health care used to be a policy of the progressive left. It was part of the Green Party's 2008 platform. Now it is fair to say it is also Democrat "mainstream policy". In 2006, after the Iraq War, but before the financial crisis, the progressive left at DailyKos declared themselves to be the "New Mainstream". It took over a decade, but it is fair to say the once fringe positions of the progressive left are increasingly mainstream policy of the Democrat party. With each broad endorsement of a formerly progressive left policy position, the Democrats' Overton Window shifts further left, opening the party up for evolution further left on policies such as "Abolish ICE."
The second important point to consider is it is the activist wing of a party who writes the official party platform. While a candidate does not need to run on the platform specifics, the platform specifics can be used a cudgel to keep candidates true to the party, or by the opposing party to paint the candidate as out of touch.
The third issue is the activist wing of the Democrat party is made up of the progressive left. Those who will volunteer to make phone calls and canvass door to door come from the activist left wing of the party. But even the non-active progressives can have an impact in the era of social media. A Biden or a Kobuchar will not get the same level of support in a general election a Sanders or Warren will. But there is a difference between holding one’s nose to support their candidate and feeling betrayed. Sanders supporters in 2016 felt Clinton and the DNC had wronged them. They would likely feel the same way about any Democrat who endorses the concept of “Medicare for All” and then retreats to anything less than full coverage at no cost to the patient.
That means the pressure on a progressive nominee to run a progressive general election campaign will be strong. However, that opens up erosion of some of the Democrat base to hard-left third party or independent candidates like Ralph Nader in 2000 and Jill Stein in 2016, but instead erosion to more centrist third-party or independent candidates like Howard Schultz. A very progressive nominee, like Sanders, would likely motivate Shultz to go ahead with his campaign. A Biden or Klobuchar nominee would likely cause Shultz to sit 2020 out. This is why I think Bill Weld made a serious error jumping from the Libertarian Party back to the GOP to try to primary Trump. If he does not want Trump to be reelected, primarying Trump is not the way to stop him. Also, a Bill Weld at the top of an arguably centrist third party with 50-state ballot access could have gained significant Democrat votes if the Democrats nominate a very progressive nominee. Instead, the LP is likely to return to sub 1% returns. A Sanders nomination could be another 1972 George McGovern lost cause. Mainstream Democrats might endorse Shultz in hopes he wins at least one state and there is no Electoral College majority, throwing the election to the House of Representatives. This is the same strategy Evan McMullin served to some on the right in 2016. But to those hard-left progressives, represented by the Democratic Socialists of America, the Justice Democrats, and Brand New Congress, anyone who strays from the fold will be seen as misguided, a traitor, or insane. In their insane society, the sane person appears insane.
This is the Democrats’ Dilemma: Nominate a centrist, and end up with another Hillary 2016 problem of lack of core support; nominate a progressive, have them shift to the center, and end up with another Hillary 2016 problem of lack of core support; or nominate a progressive, have them run as a progressive, gain core support, but risk being tarred as an out of touch extremist and invite a third-party or independent centrist run.
Much will come down to the general sanity of the electorate in 2020, as well as the sanity of the individual voter groups. It is fair to say, many saw themselves as Sane in 2016, and saw Trump and his strongest supporters as Insane. Likewise, many of Trump's strongest supporters saw themselves and Trump as the Sane ones, and the GOP establishment and the Democrats each as Insane in their own way. The difference is now the Insane, or the fringe, whichever you choose to call them, have much bigger megaphones than they have had in the past. You may think you are the Sane one, and the voices on Twitter and Facebook are the Insane ones. But they think they are the Sane ones, and you are the Insane one.
Welcome to Harvey Holroyd's world. We are all in 1979 Marin County now.
No comments:
Post a Comment